--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-25
08:40 ---
I bootstraped a 20050123 shapshot with the d-19609
patch attached and lags_complex_divide_method=1 on
ia64-unknown-linux-gnu, and I got this bootstrap failure
in libgfortran:
--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-25
08:48 ---
Same thing:
$ cat cdivide.c
#include stdio.h
#include math.h
#include complex.h
int main()
{
float complex a,b,c;
c = a/b;
}
$ ~/gcc-bin/gcc/xgcc -fdump-rtl-all-all -fdump-tree-all -B
When an exception is thrown, terminate is called, even though
there is an appropriate handler, if there is any C code between
the exception and the handler. This is a serious problem because
a lot of third party software uses a C ABI and callbacks.
(Note that this works with Sun CC.)
--
--- Additional Comments From paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr 2005-01-25
09:45 ---
I am sorry, I missed this thread completely:
I think that this is a problem with gfortran's log10(real*4).
The following works correctly with the gcc built at the same time as gfortran -
gcc (GCC) 4.0.0
--- Additional Comments From paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr 2005-01-25
10:37 ---
I do not believe this to be a bug:
An end-of-file condition occurs when no more records exist in a file during a
sequential read, or when an end-of-file record produced by the ENDFILE statement
is
--- Additional Comments From sebastian dot pop at cri dot ensmp dot fr
2005-01-25 10:32 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)
rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz wrote:
Adding the instantiation cache was compile time neutral on normal code,
so I don't
--- Additional Comments From sebastian dot pop at cri dot ensmp dot fr
2005-01-25 10:39 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)
rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz wrote:
How? If the reference is left in symbolic form, it means that you know
nothing
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-25 10:49
---
Hi, everything looks fine here (20050124 on x86-linux), double checked the
formulas, bootstrapped c, c++, tested a few other divisions besides the
testcase (now ok), and cannot reproduce the last dump of Thomas.
--- Additional Comments From paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr 2005-01-25
10:57 ---
The segmentation fault seems to me to have the same source as PR19561 -
temporaries are not being allocated/assigned properly.
This does the first wriet OK and then seg faults on the second:
! { dg-do run
--- Additional Comments From rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
10:59 ---
Confirmed.
arm_split_constant() already knows how to handle XOR, so it should be just a
matter of copying the model used for andsi3 into the xorsi3 expander.
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From sebastian dot pop at cri dot ensmp dot fr
2005-01-25 11:02 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)
rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz wrote:
(*) I hope; scev is a mess of mutualy recursive functions --
--- Additional Comments From rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni
dot cz 2005-01-25 11:14 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)
rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz wrote:
Adding the instantiation cache was compile time neutral on normal code,
--- Additional Comments From rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni
dot cz 2005-01-25 11:16 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)
How? If the reference is left in symbolic form, it means that you know
nothing about its value, so the only thing you can do with
--- Additional Comments From rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni
dot cz 2005-01-25 11:29 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)
(*) I hope; scev is a mess of mutualy recursive functions --
analyze_scalar_evolution calling number_of_iterations calling
--- Additional Comments From rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
11:35 ---
Reopening as an enhancement request for ivopts.
--
What|Removed |Added
When using a PrintStream in order to output 101 bytes via a socket, the output
is split into to packets with 100 and 1 byte respectively. A native JDK sends
101 bytes/packet.
The program reads
import java.io.PrintStream;
import java.net.Socket;
public class Test100ByteProblem {
public
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
12:07 ---
Subject: Bug 18302
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-3_4-rhl-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-25 12:07:40
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite :
--- Additional Comments From sebastian dot pop at cri dot ensmp dot fr
2005-01-25 12:03 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)
rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz wrote:
--- Additional Comments From rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni
dot
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
12:12 ---
Subject: Bug 17255
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-3_4-rhl-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-25 12:12:09
Modified files:
gcc/java :
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
12:15 ---
Subject: Bug 19084
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-3_4-rhl-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-25 12:15:21
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite :
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
12:15 ---
Subject: Bug 19348
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-3_4-rhl-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-25 12:15:21
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite :
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
12:37 ---
The patch is of course wrong :-(
GCC 3.3 and GCC 3.4 can both do the tail call, so this is a new problem
for GCC 4.0. I'm going to do a better investigation this time.
--
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-25 12:39
---
Thomas, before attaching stuff to the PR, please double check your setup: on
x86, at least, the problem is definitely fixed and I cannot reproduce your
dumps. I'm currently testing on x86_64.
--
--- Additional Comments From sebastian dot pop at cri dot ensmp dot fr
2005-01-25 12:44 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)
rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz wrote:
More seriously -- which of the possibilities? If I have loops like
while (...)
--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-25
12:44 ---
The following fixes the parsing issue:
--- transfer.c.orig 2005-01-25 13:43:28.0 +0100
+++ transfer.c 2005-01-25 13:43:35.0 +0100
@@ -1041,7 +1041,7 @@
if (read_flag)
{
-
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
12:50 ---
Subject: Bug 19393
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-3_4-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-25 12:50:36
Modified files:
gcc:
--- Additional Comments From rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
12:51 ---
Nick patched this on the trunk back in March last year. I've backported the
patch to the branch.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
13:07 ---
Recategorizing.
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|ada
The following C++ generates an ICE with today's trunk when -g is passed:
extern int strlen (const char *__s) throw();
namespace std {
using ::strlen;
}
void foo()
{
using std::strlen;
}
[EMAIL PROTECTED] g++ -g -c t.cpp
t.cpp: In function ?void foo()?:
t.cpp:9: internal
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
14:21 ---
It worked with a tail call until this patch got applied:
+2004-07-10 Zdenek Dvorak [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+
+ * calls.c (check_sibcall_argument_overlap_1): Handle pointers
+ to incoming args
Compiler used: GCC 4.0 Snapshot as of 2005-01-16.
Optimization flags used:
OPTIMIZE = -march=opteron -O3 -funroll-loops -ftree-vectorize
Error doesn't occur with:
OPTIMIZE = -march=opteron -O3 -funroll-loops
---
Compiler
The attached testcase is pessimized by PRE. Be sure to get tree-level complete
loop unrolling enabled, f.i. with -O2 -funroll-loops with current mainline.
With PRE, a lot less computations are hoisted out of the inner loop. Note this
is not a regression to 3.4, which is not able to decompose
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen
dot de 2005-01-25 14:45 ---
Created an attachment (id=8060)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8060action=view)
testcase
The testcase is reduced from a complex POOMA program.
--
--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-25
14:50 ---
(In reply to comment #13)
Thomas, before attaching stuff to the PR, please double check your setup: on
x86, at least, the problem is definitely fixed and I cannot reproduce your
dumps. I'm currently
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen
dot de 2005-01-25 14:52 ---
Oh, in principle this should compile to roughly the same as
void c_test(double *a, double *b, int ei, int ej, int stridea, int strideb)
{
for (int j=0; jej; ++j)
for (int i=0;
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-25 15:01
---
I just redid the following commands, in order, on an
ia64-unknown-linux-gnu machine:
With the most recent snapshot:
$ bzcat gcc-4.0-20050123.tar.bz2 | tar -xvf -
... with the same bootstrap failure.
--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-25
15:12 ---
(In reply to comment #15)
This is an ia64 specific issue, therefore: testing on x86 and
x86-64 is ok, and definitely no bootstrap failures.
Interesting. How did you do the testing? What version
--- Additional Comments From mckinlay at redhat dot com 2005-01-25 15:12
---
Here's a test case for this bug, copied from PR18931. This will fail when
compiling from bytecode produced by Sun's javac, but not from bytecode produced
by gcj or ecj.
public class PR19505 {
public int
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
15:13 ---
The test case for PR15387 does not fail with mainline
if Zdenek's patch is reverted.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-25 15:20
---
Interesting. How did you do the testing? What version did you test
against? How did you test? Maybe something is broken in 20050123
that got fixed later, which caused this.
Nothing special, just current
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
15:23 ---
Just as an FYI, i have absoutely no plans to make it so ivopts and PRE interact
perfectly.
I only plan to disable transforms in PRE that are always unprofitable.
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen
dot de 2005-01-25 15:27 ---
I guess making PRE and ivopts playing nicely together perfectly is near to
impossible - but any improvement in the 4.0 timeframe is welcome!
--
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
15:35 ---
Subject: Re: PRE pessimizes ivopts
On Tue, 2005-01-25 at 15:27 +, rguenth at tat dot physik dot
uni-tuebingen dot de wrote:
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at tat dot physik dot
--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-25
15:40 ---
(In reply to comment #17)
Therefore, how did you get
the last dumps?
I used the xgcc from the build subdirectoy:
$ ~/gcc-bin/gcc/xgcc -fdump-rtl-all-all -fdump-tree-all -B ~/gcc-bin/gcc/
cdivide.c
--- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net
2005-01-25 15:53 ---
Subject: Re: New: exception not caught when passing through C code
jkanze at cheuvreux dot com [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| When an exception is thrown, terminate is called, even though
| there is an
--- Additional Comments From mckinlay at redhat dot com 2005-01-25 15:56
---
Using the latest GCC HEAD awt code, I can no longer reproduce this problem.
Sweet! I'm closing the PR.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-25
15:57 ---
Paolo,
could you upload the .t14.oplower dump that you got from your working
version with the d-19609 patch?
Thomas
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19609
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
Severity|critical|normal
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-25 16:01
---
Is in Comment #11, and looks fine.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19609
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
16:07 ---
With -O2 at the time the patch for PR15387 was applied, we had the
following .optimized tree for sister:
;; Function sister (sister)
sister (f, b)
{
int * tmp;
int T.2;
int T.1;
int *
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
16:10 ---
*** Bug 19622 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
16:10 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 19367 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni
dot cz 2005-01-25 15:54 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)
rakdver at atrey dot karlin dot mff dot cuni dot cz wrote:
More seriously -- which of the possibilities? If I have loops like
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-25 15:51
---
Ok, sorry, didnt' pay attention to that detail (while working on the library,
usually we install the compiler... ;)
Anyway, I'm going to build and test on ia64 too.
--
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
16:11 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 11813 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
16:11 ---
*** Bug 19620 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-25 16:13
---
... indeed, IMH-not-compiler-hacker, opinion, t14 should be the same on x86
and ia64...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19609
The following code compiles, and should not :
templateclass T
T f2(const char * s2, T arg2, T arg3);
templateclass T
T f2(const char * s2 = 0, // bug
T arg2, T arg3) {
return (s2)?arg2:arg3;
}
Same for the following :
templateclass T
class foo {
T f2(const char * s2, T arg2, T
--- Additional Comments From sebastian dot pop at cri dot ensmp dot fr
2005-01-25 16:26 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] IV-OPTS is O(N^3)
If you decide to reconstruct the tree expression, there is no reason
to stop on a phi node that has a single argument. Why would you like
--
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19625
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
16:31 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 16829 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
16:31 ---
*** Bug 19625 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
16:42 ---
Stepping down for now.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|ebotcazou at gcc dot
--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-25
16:43 ---
(In reply to comment #22)
... indeed, IMH-not-compiler-hacker, opinion, t14 should be the same on x86
and ia64...
Quite.
Could you maybe run a C-only bootstrap with the 20050123 snapshot,
modified
--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
16:43 ---
Investigating.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu
Given the attached testcase, for reference, the interesting function is
this:
int loc_test(void)
{
const Loc2 dX(1, 0);
const Loc2 k(0, 1);
return k[0].first() + dX[0].first();
}
aliasing tells us that the initializations of dX and k alias each
other:
bb 0:
D.2540 =
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at tat dot physik dot uni-tuebingen
dot de 2005-01-25 16:57 ---
Created an attachment (id=8062)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8062action=view)
testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19626
--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-01-25
17:00 ---
#ifdef EGG_ON_FACE_MODE
Sorry to have kept everybody from doing something more worthwile.
The problem was that I hadn't noticed that the patch for
PR 19468 wasn't yet in the 20050123 snapshot which I
--- Additional Comments From Matthieu dot Moy at imag dot fr 2005-01-25
17:05 ---
Bug 19625 contains two other similar testcases. They're worth trying once the
bug is fixed.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16829
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-25 17:06
---
OK ;) In Italy we say something like anything is ok, if ends ok ;)
Anyway, in the meanwhile an ia64-linux bootstrap completed fine here. I'm
running
the testsuite now.
--
gcc generates wrong code on the test case when called with
/opt/cgcc-3.4.3-20050125/bin/sh-elf-gcc -m4 -S -Os -fomit-frame-pointer test2.c
Adding -fno-if-conversion2 creates working code. It seems that the code that
modifies the stack pointer to make space for function arguments is shifted
across
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
17:15 ---
If you had used the correct types in the first place instead of this crazy
uninitialized pointer this works
(almost):
dX.D.2220.D.2170.domain_m.buffer[0].D.2098.D.2055.domain_m = 1;
--- Additional Comments From michael dot schwingen at lancom dot de
2005-01-25 17:15 ---
Created an attachment (id=8063)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8063action=view)
C source code
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19627
--- Additional Comments From michael dot schwingen at lancom dot de
2005-01-25 17:16 ---
Created an attachment (id=8064)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8064action=view)
assembler output containing wrong code
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19627
--- Additional Comments From michael dot schwingen at lancom dot de
2005-01-25 17:17 ---
Created an attachment (id=8065)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8065action=view)
last correct RTL
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19627
--- Additional Comments From michael dot schwingen at lancom dot de
2005-01-25 17:17 ---
Created an attachment (id=8066)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8066action=view)
first wrong RTL
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19627
--
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
GCC build triplet|unknown-i686-linux |
GCC host triplet|unknown-i686-linux |
GCC
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
17:18 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
17:20 ---
D.2540 = (struct Loc1 *) dX.D.2210.D.2166.domain_m.buffer;
That confuses the aliasing mechanism
buffer is of type int* but you are casting it to Loc1 *.
--
--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
17:24 ---
This looks like wrong code as nothing in the ada front-end/testsuite changed.
Confirmed.
Here are the only changes that might have an effect (on targets since it seems
like it was all targets where
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
17:33 ---
Fixed by:
2004-12-14 Steve Ellcey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* libgfortran/io/transfer.c (us_read): Use memcpy/memset
instead of assignment to fill unaligned buffer.
(us_write): Ditto.
--- Additional Comments From sje at cup dot hp dot com 2005-01-25 17:20
---
The patch for this fix was checked in. The final patch was:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-12/msg00953.html
Does anything else need to be done for this to be closed?
--
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
18:16 ---
rth suggested not TERing into function arguments of a tail call, which
seems like a good idea that I will give a try.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19616
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
18:16 ---
As I said this is an Ada front-end bug.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
18:19 ---
Subject: Bug 19609
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-25 18:19:10
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog tree-complex.c
Log
--
Bug 18902 depends on bug 19609, which changed state.
Bug 19609 Summary: [4.0 Regression] real and imaginary part interchanged when
flags_complex_divide_method=1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19609
What|Old Value |New Value
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 18:26
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
18:44 ---
Subject: Bug 19556
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-25 18:44:05
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/i386:
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
18:44 ---
Subject: Bug 19584
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-25 18:44:05
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/i386:
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 18:51
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-01/msg01815.html
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25 18:51
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-01/msg01815.html
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
19:11 ---
Removing the target milestone per Mark:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-01/msg01255.html.
This is only known to happen on VAX.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
19:14 ---
Is this fixed or just keeping open for a reason?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17401
--
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P1 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17964
--
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |minor
Priority|P2 |P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18595
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|aph at gcc dot gnu dot org |unassigned at gcc dot gnu
||dot org
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
19:32 ---
Subject: Bug 19337
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-25 19:32:53
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog tree-inline.c
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
19:47 ---
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-01/msg01828.html.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-25
19:49 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Regarding:
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.2/gcc/Function-Attributes.html#Function%20Attributes
When using an attribute that take parameter arguments, such as the
format attribute, one needs to start counting parameters at *2* in C++
because (i'm assuming here) 'this' (the current object's
1 - 100 of 152 matches
Mail list logo
